Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Nov 3, 2010 1:36pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

[Just received from a friend who has spent a lot of time in and around "the hill").

With yet another new dawn breaking over the political landscape, I humbly present a modest proposal.

Let the first bill passed by Congress and sent to the White House for signature be a law repealing Medicare for one year. It would do wonders for the budget. The so-called “Tea Party” should be behind this 100%, dragging along the rest of the Republican party. If Americans freak out at the consequences, then maybe this country can thereafter have a real discussion about the budget deficit.

This idea occurred to me last night while watching the election returns on MSNBC. Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow were interviewing a Congresswoman who claimed that all our ills would be cured by cutting discretionary spending other than the defense budget. Matthews stated that about 8% (I think) of the budget is discretionary after excluding defense. Since cutting out all discretionary spending won’t dent the problem, let’s give the people what they want — a truly smaller government. Let’s get the damn government hands off our Medicare!

It is high time to pull down the little, petty and mean spirited emperor’s pants

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Nov 3, 2010 9:40pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

This is actually very funny.

And now that we have a regular Deadhead Political Hour here, when will Ann Coulter show up?

Incidentally, what a very interesting proposal from the congresswoman. Was it A Modest Proposal in the same category as eating the children of Ireland, or serious? In the country where I live, there is a semi-functional non-government wherein a constitution is being "written" by a parliament that includes people who are illiterate. They, at least, have an excuse for their illiteracy and ignorance.

What's remarkable is how the factionalism, inability to work together, ignorance and sheer rhetorical extremism that is somewhat inevitable in the third world, where there is almost no history of democracy, is being matched so pathetically well these days in the good old USA. And then we bring lawmakers from third world countries to DC on junkets so they can "learn" how democracy functions. Sigh.

OK, I'm trying to stay out of this political discussion, so that's enough ranting! At least until Ann Coulter shows up. Hey, maybe that's the secret identify of I. Sucks ...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Nov 3, 2010 10:10pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Oh , please do not invoke that . It's the thing that shall not be named .( shudder )Like Sauron or Voldemort , but stuck in Travis Bickle's body forever .
On a positive note no one got killed in yesterdays election , which is unfortunately a rare event around the world . It says something of merit .
And hello . Hope you are well , ect.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Nov 3, 2010 10:43pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

You're right. Must not invoke. Though when my kid walks down the street here, people do often say, "Harry Potter!" (Really. He finds it annoying.) So maybe that will keep me safe :-)

Btw (as the rant continues), hereabouts people stand in long, long lines for hours in the broiling sun to cast votes. Family members spell each other in line, particularly the elderly ones, who are almost always illiterate and vote by recognizing party symbols. Interesting comparison to the low voter turnout in the US ...

Btw, people don't tend get killed during elections here, either. I don't know about the rest of the world, but overall, I think that's more of a stereotype. There's some corruption and violence, but third world democracies, at least this one, are probably no worse than the US in the early 1800s. Highly imperfect, but what isn't? Better than absolute rule!

This post was modified by AltheaRose on 2010-11-04 05:43:15

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Nov 3, 2010 10:53pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

I do not know much about N. as a culture or nation outside of the basics . I think that a people who treasure their franchise so much , that they are willing to wait hours under difficult conditions to vote , is inspiring . I wonder if the Founders ever thought their political ideas would have such a broad impact .
I do disagree about the general peaceful nature of elections . Mexico , Guatemala , Nicaragua , Columbia , Ecuador , Panama , Venezuela , Peru , and Bolivia have all had lethal political violence in the last 20 years . El Salvador and Chile just miss the cut off date . That's just L. & S.America , minus the Caribbean , which would add to the list . Granted the list in Europe is very small and zero in N.America & Australia , but would have a heavy number in the other two continents . It is a spectrum , and around the world , in many countries , voting rights are respected . However , the majority of countries have , "political violence in your cities " , as a regular possibility .(B.Marley)( and what inspired the great musical culture of reggae music that blossomed in the '70's , but the constant political turmoil between Manley and Seaga .)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Nov 3, 2010 11:27pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Well, there's a continuum. Political violence around the world can be anywhere from rock-throwing thuggery to abduction and murder of opponents. All of which is horrible, obviously, but I tend to suspect that the prevalence of actual murder is not nearly as widespread as the image.

Maybe I'm just reacting to the sense I have that Americans, in general (I'm not saying you ... you have actual country names there, most of which a lot of folks undoubtedly couldn't find on the map), tend to stereotype the third world and think it's just Awful Awful Awful while everything in the US is The Best In the World.

Yes, there's a lot of awful, but it's complex awful. Just like the US has both complex good and complex awful and lots of in between. (There we go with those shades of gray again ... must be one of those "hippie" things!)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Nov 3, 2010 11:55pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

I love the questions from the tots that have only deep pewter colored answers . I say to D. (who says hello), was it always this way ? All this gray ?
The counties I listed have had reported multiple deaths during elections . Mexico is currently fighting a low grade civil war along the U.S. border , and on the Yucatan Peninsula , which they claim has cost 25K deaths since '06 . Much of the volatility in the other countries I mentioned is economic ; recently brought about by a mandated reduction in state spending (good ol IMF) , combined by a large currency devaluation . A lot also has to do with the control of the drug trade and some good old fashioned ideological aggressiveness . The reasons may be different elsewhere , but the result is the same .
And why I do think America is pretty damn cool , we are not a shining city upon a hill . The foundations of our country are made of clay . Just like every other country that has ever been . This thing of ours is a fragile gift .

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Nov 4, 2010 5:02am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Interesting thread.
I thought about this after posting the story of my minor viting mishap Tuesday. Upon discovering that the machines weren't working, a number of us were very vocal about our displeasure. When I got to work I quickly googled telephone numbers and filed a variety of complaints, county board of elections, Committee of Seventy etc. I gave (actually, demanded that they make a note of) my name and phone number, and looked for local people blogging the election to make sure they knew about it. I also recounted the story to anyone who would listen for the next several hours.

Well aware, of course, that there are still places in the world where I wouldn't have dared complain loudly and publicly about voting irregularities, at the risk of various penalties or even disappearing in the middle of the night.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Nov 4, 2010 7:09am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

My gosh--that's a lot of energy. In my state, 60% vote early via mail in--it's really the way to go, RLO. Is it easy where you are, cause I highly recommend it...?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Nov 4, 2010 7:13am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Nope, not in PA. We're one of the most restrictive states in terms of voting options. There's no such thing as mail-in. The only option other than showing up at the polls is absentee, and they don't make that easy.

Until just a couple of years ago we still had ancient voting machines with the metal levers.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Nov 4, 2010 7:22am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Yikes!? Didn't know that...that's a bummer; we make a ritual of sitting down with all the propositions and coffee, and reading thru--they really are complicated--and if I had to do that all, THEN go to polls, etc., it'd be much harder. Really. We always have a bunch that are near and dear to my heart ("environmental" sorts, etc; we have so much public land, grazing issues, etc).

Rats.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Nov 4, 2010 7:38am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

I would love that .
I can't see an actual ballot until I receive it after checking in at the voting precinct . There were many items on the ballot , several I had never heard of . I try to keep up on these things , so it seems a bit sneaky to me . The D's and R's control the actual process of elections and if you are not of one of those parties , g'luck getting on the ballot , as you have to do so town by town instead of one stop shopping at the Capitol . If you are not of a party you can not vote in any primary . Ballot initiative's ? I don't think so . It's the whole edifice that the two parties control so that they have dominance in every election . Forgive me one number . This is from exit polling (13K sample base nationwide ), D fav rating 38% , R fav. rating 36% . Both not winning numbers . How about a fiscally conservative , socially neutral party ? Oh , it's the Libertarian Party . But they make you buy a black leather jacket to join ( unless your Bob Barr ) so it's kinda restrictive . Seriously almost every L I've seen on T.V. and many in person when I was thinking of joining was into leather . Which is fine . But a majority of folks at the caucus ? I felt like I was at a Bob Jones church and I didn't have a suit on . I was only in a simple cloth coat . They did let me bring my dog in .;-)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: unclejohn52 Date: Nov 3, 2010 1:42pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Give them a real taste... don't stop there. Cut the defense budget in half. Stop all unemployment and Food Stamp programs cold, drop all education support, Federal construction programs, etc...

Listen to a country howl...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Nov 3, 2010 2:17pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Yes, even as a war mongering history buff, I am constantly amazed by the military industrial complex and the expenditures associated with it to fight "the last war" as we with war on the brain term it...lets call IT discretionary, and stop it for a year...we'll find out two things: how many people ARE employed by the gubermint, directly or indirectly thru "it", and we won't be attacked...

I am no peacenik, and there are a number of great ideas out there on minimizing the threat from terrorism with far less money; the amt we spend on "it" is either a manifestation of a new and different "welfare state" (this is NO knock on the warrior, some of which are family members), or a manifestation of a frighteningly naive and ignorant approach to maintaining our safety and role as world watchdog (ie, lets face it, we do have our special interests overseas).

OK, I gotta stop these political/military nonDEAD posts, right?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: fenario80 Date: Nov 3, 2010 2:28pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

I'm sure you know that when DDE made that famous speech about the military-industrial complex, he was persuaded at the last minute to excise the word "corporate." It's all about profit: just look at what happened in Iraq. The national treasury was dumped posthaste into the pockets of grossly overpaid private miltary contractors, while our real American warriors had to buy their own body armor. It's despicable, and, like the economic crash, somehow all Obama's fault ...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Nov 3, 2010 3:34pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

"You go to war with the Army you have" - Donald Rumsfeld

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: fenario80 Date: Nov 3, 2010 2:54pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

PS I gotta second the love for those military history digressions, though, because I love that stuff. Really enjoyed your post today about the Zulu - who knew? Well, I guess you, and probably a few million other people, but I didn't.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Nov 3, 2010 3:15pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Well, really Fen, don't encourage me, or I'll really start posting again ("hmmm...?" I hear most everyone here wondering to themselves: "this is a SLOW down?").

One of my all time fav movies to watch with the sons (as I did with my old man) is "Zulu" (MCaine's intro movie if you like him; along with a number of well known brit actors: Nigel Green, Sydney Baker, etc.) which though over the top for sure, gives a solid account of the battle that followed the one MJ and I were speaking of elsewhere. That would be the battle of Rorke's Drift, 100 some odd members of the 24th foot against 4k Zulus, in which 11 or so VC's were awarded (yes, the most ever for an engagement). They lost 20 men, and held. Yeah for our team! Well, forgive that imperialist outburst, but you get the idea.

There is a pathetic movie with Burt Lancaster in his WORST performance as a brit officer, "Zulu Dawn" that covers the first battle, at Isandlwana, made in 79, but make sure you rent the plain "Zulu" flick if you go for it. In that battle, due to a strategic blunder by the leader, and some tactical mistakes/miscues, 1500 troops/aux's were slaughtered, incld young boys that had terrible things done to them, and it represented by far the worst "loss" to the brits til WWI.

Here's a pic I took in the BrMus of a famous painter of the defense of Rorke's Drift (see? I warned you!):



Attachment: Rorke_sDrift.jpg

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: fenario80 Date: Nov 3, 2010 3:29pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Just bumped Zulu to the top of my netflix list - i may have actually seen that movie in the early 80's but remember nothing abiout it. Thanks for the rec.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Nov 3, 2010 9:37pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Well, you never know what you'll learn here! Thanks for the movie review break here during the Deadhead Political Hour. My kid has developed a huge interest in that particular war, for some reason. I can hold my own on the CW, but the Zulus ... um, not so much. That will go on the Watch-Over-Xmas list (since Netflix doesn't exactly deliver here.)

edit: This just sunk in ... Burt Lancaster as a British officer?!? That sure will be, um, interesting.

This post was modified by AltheaRose on 2010-11-04 04:37:18

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Nov 3, 2010 9:45pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Just make sure you get "Zulu", not "Zulu Dawn", or "Shaku Zulu"...Any movie with Richard Burton narrating the opening, and the Welsh Borderers (Miss D? Do I have that right?) singing, has got to be good...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: angular Date: Nov 3, 2010 3:40pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Please, I don't care to see Chis or Rachel without pants.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Nov 3, 2010 1:49pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

I feel that as a member of the forum that this thread is both partisan and political . My various sensibilities have been knocked about by such a vicious and misleading thread title . Can I hope for any recourse other then ,

http://www.archive.org/details/gd69-04-05.sbd.miller.18701.sbesok.shnf

Probably not . Your attempts to resurrect this subject , again , after a week of frickin' political threads and senseless comments and posturing ..... makes me ... think of free speech . And of how no one got shot or killed voting yesterday .

btw - Dire if you are out there, you have a looooong review in the above show ( It's from '05 ). CC has a review as well .

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Nov 3, 2010 3:38pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Micah shoots, scores and wins!

I'm streaming .... and this show truly drips.

This post was modified by bluedevil on 2010-11-03 22:38:15

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Nov 3, 2010 3:50pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Micah shoots, scores and wins!

I've never scored in my small number of minutes on the court . Round Mound was my nickname . Not very inventive , but quite accurate .
So I don't know what to do . Should I blush ? Where do I stand ? I'm feeling faint . Can I keep the game ball ?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Nov 3, 2010 4:21pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Micah shoots, scores and wins!

Sure - take your ball and go home, but please bear in mind that no nets worth cutting get cut until March (and most importantly on April 4th).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: user unknown Date: Nov 3, 2010 4:18pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Wouldn't a 3 year moratorium on ALL foreign aid accomplish even more? Why it it that we can take care of the world, but not worry about our own problems.

I know that isolationism is not the answer, but is cutting medical aid to those who really need it? Medicare should be regulated tighter, and Medicare fraud prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

This post was modified by user unknown on 2010-11-03 23:18:18

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: snow_and_rain Date: Nov 4, 2010 8:02am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

The savings would be paltry compared to the damage done to US foreign policy. Foreign aid constitutes less than 1% of the federal budget. The vast majority of that aid doesn't go to poor countries; it goes to strategic allies like Israel, Egypt, and of course Iraq and Afghanistan.

The idea that cutting foreign aid will save the country is just Tea Party nonsense.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: user unknown Date: Nov 4, 2010 10:05am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

I must admit my own ignorance here. I thought the % was much higher than that. I just read that the average American thinks approximately 24% of the budget goes to foreign aid, so I am not the only one that isn't in the know.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Daddy D Date: Nov 3, 2010 2:58pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Another fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Well, after posting & complaining earlier about all the politics showing up on this forum, here I am not even a week later allowing myself to get dragged into the cesspool. To be fair, however, I didn't intend my post to infer that politics (or other non-Dead topics) should never be discussed, but that IF ALL CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS EVER TALK ABOUT IS POLITICS AND OTHER B.S. AND THEY NEVER DISCUSS THE DEAD than IMHO they should be banned. Ahem, now stepping onto the soap box myself--below is an email that I received that I think EVERYONE should get behind, regardless of your political leanings:
-----------------------------------------------------------

The Time Has Indeed Come! This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, please pass it on. An idea whose time has come!

Governors of 35 states have already filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon them. It only takes 38(of the 50) States to convene a Constitutional Convention.

For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest was to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform ... in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn't seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law.

I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop.

A Constitutional Convention - this is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come. And, with the advent of modern communication, the process can be moved along with incredible speed. There is talk out
there that the "government" doesn't care what the people think. That is irrelevant. It is incumbent on the population to address elected officials to the wrongs afflicted against the populace .. you and me. Think about this ..

The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971 ..before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc.
Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land .. all because of public pressure.

I'm asking each addressee to forward this Email to a minimum of twenty people on their Address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise. In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.

Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."

---------------------------------------------------------

Sounds like common sense to me!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Nov 3, 2010 3:08pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

I blame Woodrow Wilson.

You old timer forumites already know why.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Nov 3, 2010 3:10pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Ha! That is a great one! Talk about a simpleton with some naive, if well-intentioned, notions about the world! Poor guy, though--dealing with the "tough politicos" (brit/frenchies--amazing, eh?, not to mention his own house stateside) post WWI did put him in his grave...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Nov 3, 2010 4:20pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

I meant the debacle at Jekyll Island - known today as the Federal Reserve.

The very same Federal Reserve that just pimped our grandchildren to the tune of $600 BILLION in brandy, new, all fresh and clean smelling, hopey, changey Treasury bonds to buy by the middle of 2011.

Am I the only one whos blood runs cold when I read the words "The Federal Reserve launched an unorthodox new policy...."?

Why is this not being screeched from the left and right alike? Where is Keith Olbermann with one of his snarky soliloquies. Why isn't that dude Rachel Maddow wrinkling her forehead in mock puzzlement. Why isn't Chris Matthews getting his tongue stuck in his teeth running his pie hole, where is Glenn beck having an apoplectic seizure and meltdown?

None of this is happening because they are all to freaking stupid to understand the implications of piling more unsustainable debt on an already unsustainable debt.

I mean, if the house is going to burn down anyway, let's at least make it a big ass bonfire.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Nov 3, 2010 6:24pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Yup, I recalled it, as I am sure we spoke of it here or elsewhere at some pt, but of course, I always think of France and his troubles there...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billydlions Date: Nov 3, 2010 4:33pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Hey Mando, Have you ever watched Kyle Bass on CNBC? Check out his video (actually go to their website and watch both the videos from August & October). Bottom line is you are correct. We should be very worried.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232/?video=1608686095&;play=1

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Nov 3, 2010 6:26pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Kyle Bass is all over this. I hadn't seen this clip, but he has been hitting this theme for months. Faber did a pretty good job with this one I thought.

I just wish someone would talk about the 800 pound gorilla in the room - the fact that the Fed now has no other options and is essentially in uncharted waters and winging it.

'Scary' comes up a little short I think.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: skuzzlebutt Date: Nov 3, 2010 1:46pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

Why do you want someone to pull down your pants?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billydlions Date: Nov 3, 2010 4:09pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: A fellow Deadhead's modest proposal (non-Dead non-partisan(?) political)

just an fyi: 92% of the budget is not for defense. I think he meant defense & entitlements. The budget for 2010 is 3.6 tril with perhaps 1 tril going to defense. BTW- tax receipts are approx 2.2 tril.

I guess Chris Matthews didnt have a thrill running up his leg yesterday.





Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Nov 3, 2010 6:27pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: It's too expensive to live forever

Yup, BDL; they always under-estimate D-fence spending one way or another...and I don't want to spend it all on making sure we all live to be 95 neither.

One thing we have to do right away is up the SS age limits: too many folks are living WAY too long. Seriously; life expectancy is rapidly increasing. If you're religious, I say "what are you waiting for?" and if your not, really, same question applies. Does that sound cranky?

I hate to say it, but I am the first to admit keeping me around is getting pretty darn expensive. I ask you, is it really worth it? Well, okay--don't answer.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billydlions Date: Nov 3, 2010 6:45pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: It's too expensive to live forever

Ironically enough, I actually believe the tea party is correct, even if their motives are dubious. We need to find a way to cut almost 1 tril in spending from the budget and everything has to be on the table. This will be very painful for many people but necessary for survival. Just look at what's happening to Japan because that's the road we are traveling (see that link I sent Mando). The bottom line is our country is going through a big secular shift (typically happens every 100 years). In 15 years the boomers will be between 65-80, so the situation gets even worse- our biggest demographic will work against economic growth, draining our coffers through entitlements. Add to this the potential hyper inflation that the Fed is trying its best to cause which will skyrocket the cost of our debt through higher interest rates. The Keynesian end game will soon be here when our interest is greater than our tax revenues. I could babble on and on so I'll shut up.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Nov 3, 2010 9:36pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: It's too expensive to live forever

The only irony is that ever prior prediction of stall, and I mean in all domains (energy, economic, population, industrial), has generally been followed by an unforseen change in underlying assumptions (re: Malthus, industrial revolution, green revolution, on down the line the past 200 yrs), and off we go again...don't get me wrong, I am a realist, and in no way sit around hoping for the next "techno/newage/whoa!who'dofthunkit!?" solution to fall into our lap, but it does make the Polly Anna response had to defend against...if you follow. But, in a sense, "the grow our way out of it" approach is what we always end up doing, one way or another, generally by something new coming along that alters the parameters at hand, whatever the domain.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Nov 3, 2010 6:42pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: It's too expensive to live forever

"If you're religious, I say "what are you waiting for?" and if your not, really, same question applies. Does that sound cranky?"

A bit, yes :)

"I hate to say it, but I am the first to admit keeping me around is getting pretty darn expensive. I ask you, is it really worth it? Well, okay--don't answer."

Oh, come now ...

Just to weigh in on the original topic, I'm certainly aware up close and personal of this attitude that the government should immediately stop all this terrible out-of-control spending ... and what do you mean I'm not covered for xyz????!!!! Why not!!! I know my rights!!!